Might want to kill this one too. - Patstuart talk| edits 18:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Comments such as 'I'm sure being gay and having a sense of humor didn't help either' are unhelpful and fail to assume good faith. You have been talked to about assuming good faith before. Please provide evidence when insinuating an admin is bigoted or is will be construed as a personal attack. If you cannot find evidence then keep it to yourself for the sake of civility, which is not optional here. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
It always tickles me when an admin lectures me on a guideline without actually reading (or reflecting upon) said guideline.
Suffice it to say I respectfully disagree and my position remains the same. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
You were complaining I has used the term Personal attack when I was meaning to refer to a more general violation of WP:CIVILITY. I think you are a very intelligent person, and I saw you were using this point to argue against my position. So I clarified it, in other words I spelled it out. If you can explain how this is uncivil I will certainly listen. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
lol, thanks, I needed a laugh. Hey, no hard feelings, this is about policy, not about you as a person. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Err, you mind sectioning off those nasty comments? I sure don't want them looking like they're mine. =) -- Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 00:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Please see my reply to your post on the administrators' noticeboard. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 21:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC) reply
hi, HIBC, just a friendly and official objection to your timecop block. I understand the list of points you raised on the talk page, but the block is I feel unwarranted and should be reviewed by uninvolved parties, although i understand that you feel a swath of admins somehow are backing up the decision. If you review previous AfDs initiated by the editor, you will find many strong nominations, well-supported, well substantiated to a degree that would make even brenneman proud. Other editors such as myself (Proto, Guy, etc...), with extensive authorships, article contribs, FAC work, etc.. etc.. across the wikispace, and with collectively tens of thousands of edits, can support and indeed have fully supported these efforts, the user's childishness notwithstanding. This is I feel a strong endorsement since were the user trolling, seasoned editors would not be likely to review and take seriously the AfDs that were brought forth. Cheers Please accept my apologies.
Eusebeus
23:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The STS-116 picture is now in an article. I don't know if this will change your vote, but now the reason you gave for not voting is null. Sharkface217 23:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC) reply
plz respond -- Jmax- 03:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm sick of them. Please, feel free to delete it, even though I maintain that it's a valid fair use image. I've begun to stop caring about this image, or any other aspect of this website. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Hello,
I, User:Srkris, dont need to change any IPs since my ISP allots dynamic IPs. By not logging in, I can still use or edit wikipedia. I had informed another admin about my warning which I left on User:Ncmvocalist's page. The next thing I see is that you extended my block, for warning him not to remove my comments from talk pages of articles. Please see reason. I am not a vandal, if that's what you're thinking! The original block itself was because this User:Ncmvocalist left bogus warnings on my talk page and one admin seemed to think they were real warnings. I dont know whether to laugh or cry seeing your actions. 59.92.46.152 15:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Hello. I am concerned that your allegations about abusive telephone calls made by User:Timecop will be treated as a rationale for the block by others, despite the alleged phone calls being off-wiki actions. I have raised this concern on User talk:Timecop. - Mark 03:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I was going to work out how best to undelete the article, but decided against it as it would have been foolish and disruptive in the extreme. How this page got picked up to be vandalised - I have no idea! Do people have a watch on the new pages and filter for the words "GNAA"?!? Bizarre! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Hey, I just noticed that all the images (I really like Image:Victoria harbor yin-yan.jpg) cause the edit links to bunch up much further down the page. Now, with this whole Timecop shitstorm brewing (I feel bad about you getting the brunt of the attacks for my actions), perhaps you don't want the edit links properly placed, but if you do, I'd suggest checking out WP:BUNCH. Example 2 is very easy and easy to maintain after the fact,. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Might want to kill this one too. - Patstuart talk| edits 18:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Comments such as 'I'm sure being gay and having a sense of humor didn't help either' are unhelpful and fail to assume good faith. You have been talked to about assuming good faith before. Please provide evidence when insinuating an admin is bigoted or is will be construed as a personal attack. If you cannot find evidence then keep it to yourself for the sake of civility, which is not optional here. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
It always tickles me when an admin lectures me on a guideline without actually reading (or reflecting upon) said guideline.
Suffice it to say I respectfully disagree and my position remains the same. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
You were complaining I has used the term Personal attack when I was meaning to refer to a more general violation of WP:CIVILITY. I think you are a very intelligent person, and I saw you were using this point to argue against my position. So I clarified it, in other words I spelled it out. If you can explain how this is uncivil I will certainly listen. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
lol, thanks, I needed a laugh. Hey, no hard feelings, this is about policy, not about you as a person. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Err, you mind sectioning off those nasty comments? I sure don't want them looking like they're mine. =) -- Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 00:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Please see my reply to your post on the administrators' noticeboard. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 21:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC) reply
hi, HIBC, just a friendly and official objection to your timecop block. I understand the list of points you raised on the talk page, but the block is I feel unwarranted and should be reviewed by uninvolved parties, although i understand that you feel a swath of admins somehow are backing up the decision. If you review previous AfDs initiated by the editor, you will find many strong nominations, well-supported, well substantiated to a degree that would make even brenneman proud. Other editors such as myself (Proto, Guy, etc...), with extensive authorships, article contribs, FAC work, etc.. etc.. across the wikispace, and with collectively tens of thousands of edits, can support and indeed have fully supported these efforts, the user's childishness notwithstanding. This is I feel a strong endorsement since were the user trolling, seasoned editors would not be likely to review and take seriously the AfDs that were brought forth. Cheers Please accept my apologies.
Eusebeus
23:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
reply
The STS-116 picture is now in an article. I don't know if this will change your vote, but now the reason you gave for not voting is null. Sharkface217 23:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC) reply
plz respond -- Jmax- 03:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm sick of them. Please, feel free to delete it, even though I maintain that it's a valid fair use image. I've begun to stop caring about this image, or any other aspect of this website. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Hello,
I, User:Srkris, dont need to change any IPs since my ISP allots dynamic IPs. By not logging in, I can still use or edit wikipedia. I had informed another admin about my warning which I left on User:Ncmvocalist's page. The next thing I see is that you extended my block, for warning him not to remove my comments from talk pages of articles. Please see reason. I am not a vandal, if that's what you're thinking! The original block itself was because this User:Ncmvocalist left bogus warnings on my talk page and one admin seemed to think they were real warnings. I dont know whether to laugh or cry seeing your actions. 59.92.46.152 15:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Hello. I am concerned that your allegations about abusive telephone calls made by User:Timecop will be treated as a rationale for the block by others, despite the alleged phone calls being off-wiki actions. I have raised this concern on User talk:Timecop. - Mark 03:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
I was going to work out how best to undelete the article, but decided against it as it would have been foolish and disruptive in the extreme. How this page got picked up to be vandalised - I have no idea! Do people have a watch on the new pages and filter for the words "GNAA"?!? Bizarre! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply
Hey, I just noticed that all the images (I really like Image:Victoria harbor yin-yan.jpg) cause the edit links to bunch up much further down the page. Now, with this whole Timecop shitstorm brewing (I feel bad about you getting the brunt of the attacks for my actions), perhaps you don't want the edit links properly placed, but if you do, I'd suggest checking out WP:BUNCH. Example 2 is very easy and easy to maintain after the fact,. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC) reply